Let's see if Debra Walker can convert talk into action first, as she's been on the job for some time and has not been able to close the deal on housing and land use reform.

Let's see if Debra can move a Prop M for housing forward as she's indicated a preference.

If she can, then Leno should consider endorsing her. If she can't then she cannot demonstrate that she has the resources at her disposal to earn support.

That would show that Leno is on the right side of the housing debate and would show that Walker is capable of moving a bold proposal that is required to stop the march of the luxury condos.

Frankly, unless the development inspired gentrification can be stopped, district six will cease to be a progressive district in short order.

-marc
who is not running for supervisor in d6 in 2010 unless women and people of color insist upon it, considering with his husband cashing out the house and moving to portland oregon to early retire within 5 yr unless progressives get their asses in gear and stop the rampant gentrification of sf.

Since you want to be premature like a hot date.
Jim Meko has also expressed a desire to run for the district 6 seat as well and is much more qualified than Ms Walker.

Marc Salomon, I find it more than a bit humorous that you threaten to move to Portland, Oregon in response to the "rampant gentrification" of San Francisco. Yes, move to a whitebread, yuppie town to protest gentrification in San Francisco--give us all a break!

In any event, I would suggest that should Mark Leno endorse any candidate for the Board of Supervisors, he not blindly endorse a candidate because the Guardian tells him "she's pretty much perfect for the job" without giving much more justification for endorsing her (I am glad to know she is queer, an artist, and an "activist," but none of these things necessarily make a person the best candidate for an elected position). Before Mark Leno endorses anyone, he should take his time to get to know all the candidates and learn their positions on local issues and their plans to improve the community, and then he should endorse the person who he believes will best represent the interests of San Francisco--that would be showing true "independence" just as the Guardian has urged him to do.

Threat? Who's threatening? All we're looking at is buying a house free and clear in SE PDX and having to pay $2000/year in taxes and feed ourselves in our early 50s.

At the rate that things are going in the Mission, its going to look much more pasty white like SE Portland in a few years time because the current board of supervisors as well as the Guardian and stalwarts like Debra Walker and our advocacy groups, a half bakery full of loaves of white bread if I've ever seen one, are not using their power to make a difference where it counts.

The future of San Francisco hangs in the balance and all we get is back slapping progs, condo towers out the ass and folks getting paid to do political work who are failing and for whom there is no, absolutely NO accountability for serial failure.

-marc

It rains every day in Portland.

Tim, this is real. The other side is playing to win. Our side is not playing to win,

I've seen little from Mark Leno or Carole Migden that points to either having a clue about development politics on the east side of SF.

Debra is a nice person and has a clue, but can't execute which is pretty stunning given her connections with the liberal/progressive community.

A track record of accomplishment is very helpful. The Arts task force is very nice, however the product of the Arts Task Force is not going to be particularly useful in solving the the housing, transportation and land use problems facing D6.

It is not worth my while to take valuable time after working a full day to spend it with people who are get paid to do political work, people who play for keeps only to grasp power for themselves and their friends, not to use it to decisively beat our opponents in the best interests of a diverse San Francisco.

And no, it is colder and wetter up in Portland, but its sunnier and warmer for longer than here as well, and their bicycle infrastructure, advocacy and facilities are not sclerotic like ours.

-marc

I know it's real, Marc, but it's been a particularly bitter couple of days around here so I thought I'd inject a note of levity. I have spent a lot of time in SF Portland, and since I am the sort who doesn't feel safe riding a bike in the rain, it's not a great bicycle city for me. But it is a less-expensive and less-frenetic city with a lot of progressive politics.

And while Portland is, indeed, overwhelmingly white, it still has a working class, even in SE (which has been gentrified, just not as fast as SF). It also has more strip clubs per capita than any other city in the country.

And I hate to see people like you, Marc, forced to think about leaving town.

And the Latino population is growing in Portland as well.

If current development proposals move forward, combined with recently passed Octavia Market with its 3,000+ luxury condos in D6, all of D6, 9 and 10 will be hard pressed to elect progressives over the next few cycles.

We need to look at the Morgan Hill Residential Control System

http://www.morgan-hill.ca.gov/html/citysvc/city/pdf/ch1878.pdf

For an example of how we can limit the amount of new housing produced and ensure it pays for itself. This has been done in a podunk little burg down near San Jose. NO way that Planning can say that this is too difficult or too complex for them.

Instead of charging exactions, the system assigns point values to all sorts of community benefits and doesn't allow permits to be issued until a project meets a minimum threshold of points.

Then, it ranks all applications in descending order by score and only allocates the number of units available under the annual allocation.

Combine this with a Prop E style MUNI performance and improvements package, that is no housing until we get good transit, and we've got a winner.

If Debra Walker can leverage her connections to get this on the ballot for November, I'd consider supporting her.

If Debra can't, then the SFBG should reconsider its early stance in favor of candidates with track records of accomplishment like Meko.

I'd have hoped the Leno Migden fight would have been a contest on how many progressive bills each could pass and get signed into law, but its descended into a shitstorm.

Let D6 be represented for the next term by those who rise in a meritocracy!

-marc

What I want to see in D6 is real concessions from developers that create tangible affordable housing results. Just giving money to non-profits will go to staff salaries, which will eventually run out. Requiring the developer to build a certain amount of affordable housing lasts forever.

Technically they only last 40 years, not forever.

I also want to see us use Affordable Housing charter amendment money or mortgage revenue bonds (which the bofs can issue) to buy into construction with small time builders like the RBA.

If we give them slight height bonuses (45-55') and contribute 1/2 of the capital cost to build the building, owning it outright or being on the hook for residents paying the costs of construction in rent, this might be a way to get 1:1 market to affordable onsite.

But daylight's burning here, people. We're past urgency and are being whipsawed by Newsom. I'm not sure that the people with 20+ years of experience in not solving our housing problems are the ones to look to for leadership in the future.

-marc

Owning our 1/2, not "it" is how that should read.

-marc

Marc,

Be sure to check out the gay bathhouse after you move up north to PDX. Click here for info: http://www.steamportland.com/find.htm/ .

You might like living in a city where the local health department didn't shutter gay sexual venues out of fear, unlike San Francisco. If you do leave San Francisco, who will entertain me at Ross's monthly art parties at his City Hall office?

Michael

Michael, if development proceeds apace, there will be no more progressives in City Hall because SPUR and the Newsom corporate wing of the Democrat will have built us out of our city and replaced folks who would vote for Ross, Chris and Mark Sanchez with boring well heeled moderates like themselves who get their "good taste" from a magazine.

If there are art parties, they will be of much worse caliber than Ross or Matt's tastes. Tim Gaskin's opaque projector "crafts" is a window into the dismal, sanitized artistic future that is in store for San Francisco.

One side playing for keeps, and it is not ours.

And Portland is one of several contingencies in our five year plan, only there due to the deterioration of the situation here.

-marc

I've had at least 3 progressives express interest in the D6 seat to me. I think that any of them would make great Supervisors.

While I agree that it is premature to rally around Debra Walker, Jim Meko, or anyone else at this point, Randy Shaw most definitely obfuscates the point...

http://beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5628

Pens Shaw, "Usurping the grassroots electoral process is never a good idea, and the people of the Tenderloin, Mission, and SOMA that comprise District 6 should not have their next supervisor (sic) chosen for them as part of the Guardian’s “make up” for its backing of Leno."

The problem with Shaw's opinion is that he doesn't correct for the opposite -- how to keep a Senator Leno and his operation from delivering for a Michael Sweet or someone else from that political camp...

Chris Daly

ps. the other Chris is this thread is another Chris.

Next Thursday we'll probably see SF's two gay publications, the BAR and the Bay Times, offer up their political endorsements. I'm willing to wager that the BAR backs Leno and the Bay Times picks Migden. No matter which candidate each paper picks, it will very interesting to read the reasoning behind the endorsements of the gay papers.

For the record, I'm not trying to force the grassroots to accept anything. But I don't think it's too early for good candidates to step forward in what will be a tough race against a Newsom-backed candidate, and I'm not ashamed to say that while the Guardian hasn't endorsed in this race, I'm a big fan of Debra Walker.

So Tim, do you know where Mark Leno is on Prop F/G?

A few progressive thoughts on Debra Walker.

Where was Debra Walker on Mark Sanchez versus Heather Hiles in 2004 compared to where D6 and the Guardian were?

Where was Debra Walker on Ross Mirkarimi versus Robert Haaland in 2004 compared to where D5 and the Guardian were?

Where is Debra Walker, as a (prospective, once and future?) Democratic Party Official, on Nancy Pelosi's continued support of the criminal war in Iraq? As a member of the local governing body of the Democratic Party, Walker is particularly exposed to war crimes criminal liability under the Nuremburg Principles if she continues to give political aid and comfort to a legislator who is a direct party to enabling war crimes when her actions could have led to ousting the offender.

Where is Debra Walker on the Democratic Presidential contest compared to where the Guardian and D6 were? Hillary "you will chafe under my iron rule" Clinton, that's where. Nuff said.

I think that progressive voters on the east side have decided they'd rather follow Daly, Mirkarimi, Sanchez and Gonzalez (yes I know all men, but qualified, smart, talented, diverse men) more so than the Democratic Party clique of which Walker is a part.

Perhaps Walker is counting on the Hiles, Haaland and Clinton leaning moderates in the new D6 settlements strewn amidst the occupied affordable territories to put her over the top and that's why she is not taking strong steps and leveraging her connections to stop the gentrifying condo onslaught?

-marc

Mark,
You are great. I think I can always depend on you to say exactly what I think you will say.
That said, I support Ross for his re-election despite your venom.
The Guardian endorsed me second and Debra supported a fairly radical trans candidate. Calm down.
Robert

LENO SUPPORTS G AND OPPOSES F AND ON TOP OF THAT
HE WONT LIFT A LILLY WHITE FINGER AGAINST NEWSOM.
Marc is right, the whitewashing and gentrification of this City is uncontrolled and uncontested. With very few exceptions the anglos with political aspirations in this city have seen the writing on the wall and are simply fighting for a seat at Newsom's table and a little slice of the developer's pie, hoping no one will notice or care. They have attained at least the basic neccessities for a comfortable middle-class middle-age, and it's not in their self interest to rock the boat too much. Oh some of them still talk the talk but just about the only really committed progressive action is coming from the minority communities, women, older black activists, younger latinas and latinos, and others who aren't part of the incestuous new old-boy network. Years of infighting, jockeying for position and compromising has cut off their cojones and they have lost their courage. conviction and power.
After disposing of the lawyers, dump the politicians.
Patrick Monk.RN. Noe Valley.
Portland's cool. Go for it.873216

Hey, Robert,

I understand how important relationships in politics are to you. But while relationships are important, delivering results is more important to the constituency that really counts--folks not steeped in the political kool aid we all drink, the ones who pay the taxes and depend on services. What good are relationships in politics if they're not being leveraged politically to deliver results to them, but are being leveraged to put friends in power who, in turn, favor tending those relationships instead of delivering results?

That's what I'm seeing with Debra Walker and David Campos, folks whose prime allegiance is to their relationships rather than to tackling the difficult problems before us with progressive solutions.

David has been a police commissioner and Debra on the DBI. The SFPD raise approved on his watch is bankrupting the City and causing cuts to vital services all while violent crime is proceeding unchecked. Our transportation, housing and land use situation is deteriorating rapidly on her watch as well.

Perhaps San Francisco is destined to be a shrine to political mediocrity, where people get paid good money both inside and outside of government to stop people from solving problems. That is the model that the SF Bike Coalition has followed to grind bike policy advancements to a halt.

The Mayor is currently not delivering results--the dysfunctional cancer is apparent throughout the departments and is impacting on quality of life for all San Franciscans. That sentiment is percolating through his base, and they are having second thoughts about having supported him.

Instead of progressives identifying where Newsom is weak and calling him out on how he's not delivering city services, Chris Daly and Prop F and the Affordable Housing CA current exceptional exceptions, we're allowing Newsom's media machine to frame the debate when we know we have the people power to counter that kind of spin.

When we privilege relationships over results, we get a situation where "progressive" DA Hallinan got all misty eyed when asked to investigate Willie Brown's crimes, deferring with a teary "we've been friends for so long...."

And the same thing is going on with the Migden/Leno primary. Instead of dealing with politics, personalities are dominating as I've mentioned before. Sure, Mark has the right to challenge Carol just as Nader has the right to run for president. But given our current predicament, a full plate of local policy problems before us, is giving one clique the seat over another the wisest expenditure of resources?

The bounds of the possible are severely constrained in the Democrat caucus in Sacramento, so it is not really that important which of the three ends up in the seat. But we have learned that one cannot treat perceived underlings like shit for years and expect a free ride--Migden's spell of abuse and intimidation--she left that door wide open for Leno through her own conduct--has been broken, the only question is where around the margins will her successor take a different path. Remember, Renee Saucedo didn't really run a campaign in 2004 and almost denied Ammiano a majority. Tom needs to learn from Carole's fall to the extent that he follows in her footsteps.

And we have learned that, when given a choice, voters on the east side will support a progressive over a liberal. The stakes are too high for us to support liberals for seats winnable by progressives unless, of course, you want to score points with the Democrat hierarchy to strengthen your relationships to get more friends in power.

Sometimes in politics, you've got to put the policy interests of the public before your personal interests, to be honest with people with whom you've got a good relationship and tell them that even though you like them, policy-wise they're not pulling their weight and you're not going to support them.

-marc

Marc,
I have come to accept that you cannot see anything I do. That said, if you read the Bay Area Reporter this week, you will see that I took on one of my best friends over his role as a Board member of HRC, an organization that has actively undermined the rights of transgender people. It was extraoridarily painful and people are attacking me right and left for doing so. I am comfortable with it because I gave him ample opportunity to self-correct for months. When he walked across a picket line in D.C. of trans activists, including Shannon Mintor, he lost my friendship.
That said, you are blind to everything I do and I am not sure why.
I welcome your thoughts, but when they don't resonate as real, I am left befuddled by your analysis.
I wish you the best but it seems like you are more interested in finding ammunition to take Debra down a notch then in finding accurate information. Good luck to you.

Robert, progressive queers have had problems with the HRC since the ACT-UP days. Now that they've gored your ox it becomes a problem for you. But in reality, your quarrel in this case is not with the HRC, which got T protections amended into ENDA earlier this decade, rather with the Democrat Party hierarchy which couldn't rustle up the votes for T inclusion when push came to shove. Why you are focusing your rage on the HRC for ENDA rather than on the Congressional Democrats who balked is beyond me unless it is not politically expedient for you to challenge the Democrat hierarchy.

It is not acceptable to hold the broad base of LGB hostage to the failings of the HRC and Democrat hierarchy by denying us a first congressional victory for another sliver of rights. That is reminiscent of the one-way theory of solidarity that has kept organized labor from building a broad base amongst likely allies.

Robert, you've accomplished so much over the past few years, from defeating the Schwarzenegger onslaught to helping bring in the correct outcomes for Prop A and H that it is not appropriate to say that I never see any of your good accomplishments.

But at this point in time, if San Francisco is going to have any hope of remaining a refuge for queers, radicals, artists and folks without trust funds, we're going to have to prioritize accomplishment over loyalty, allegiance to policy over allegiance to friends and we're going to have to expand our base outwards and down even further. In D6 and D9 in particular, there are concrete policy matters which are integral to representing those districts upon which candidates must be evaluated.

One reason why we're not able to raise energy around MUNI is that reps in coalition from local 1021 have blocked any effort to mobilize riders to challenge Newsom's plans. They have insisted on grass roots participation in that they be part of originating solutions rather than asking electeds for guidance on maximizing feasibility and good outcomes, but block grassroots participation when it comes to empowering the primary stakeholders who might challenge their power. And these young organizers are actually carrying water for downtown's MUNI policy, guiding the discussion away from any sort of downtown MUNI fee and towards multiple small time revenue measures, each of which would require a significant political organizing campaign which we know because we've fought and lost those battles long before they came on the scene.

And this is emblematic of the structural impediments put in place by relationship-oriented vested interests that keep us from marshaling our comparative advantage to solve problems.

I believe that the real difference between us is that you prefer to nurture relationships amongst politicos first, in order to enable policy reform by those friends at some point, and I prefer to nurture policy reforms amongst varied coalitions as a way to affirm relationships between activists and the grassroots, expanding our base.

Ammiano says that a progressive is a person who recycles. I think that my characterization of the difference between SF progressives and liberals is more apt.

-marc

Hey Marc,
I don't want to argue with you.
Namaste.
Robert

Robert, you'd best save your arguing for the to be enraged second tier of city employees who are about to get screwed on health care and benefits that SEIU is creating.

To set matters straight, under Campos' watch, the cops got a 25% raise which is throwing the City budget into turmoil.

On your watch at the SEIU, benefits are being slashed for future employees, at the behest of ersatz Republicans like Elsbernd and Newsom, and your colleagues are fighting against progressive revenue measures so that the MUNI works for San Franciscans.

And on Debra Walker's watch, "deer in the headlights" paralysis in the face of an onslaught of development pressure has been the order of the day.

We can work across political camps, no problem, but must do so without valuing 'unity' to the extent that it cripples our integrity, our principles.

Such are the traps that people who do politics for a living fall into, relationships trumping principle, and such are the distinctions between liberal and progressive.

Solidarity, brother, is a two way street.

-marc

Hey Marc,
I know it is hard to believe but the decision on seiu retirement improvements was democratically neotiated by the contract negotiation team which is an elected body of 80 members representing all the various sectors of our membership. It was then put to the vote of the membership and over 80% of the membership decision. I had nothing to do with the negotiations or the decision. It is my job to move the will of the membership, which frankly, I do to the best of my ability. You may not like what the members decided, but since I know you are a big fan of democracy, I would hope that you could see the value of respecting it.
As for the revenue conversation, I have no idea what you are talking about.
You often impute motive or knowledge on me that I do not have but I am happy to continue to listen to all of your complaints with me mostly because I value the work you do in the world. I was serious before.
Namaste.

Thats what I get for trying to type on my trio. There are a few typos but the gist is that 80% of the membership voted to approve of proposal and the contract negotiation team negotiated it. They did not recommend it which I found to be an incredibly principled stand on their part because it meant in the field, the members and staff gave both the pros and the cons to the proposal before it was voted on. Usually when the team recommends, they don't got through the negatives.
I will note that every progressive member of the Board of Supervisors is also supporting the measure as is the SF Bay Guardian, the Harvey Milk Club, and the SF Labor Council.
So feel free to continue to share your thoughts. I welcome them.

Robert, either we stand for health care for all and expanding access as a basic human right, or we don't.

That the message was put forth and accepted that either we cut benefits for future employees or we see massive layoffs probably had something to do with it.

At the end of the day, labor further marginalizes itself by consolidating benefits for current members at the expense of future members and sets the example for continued curtailing of benefits for us all.

Again, solidarity isn't if it only goes in one direction.

-marc